02/4/14

Aggressive Breeds via Owner Accounts

Establishing ‘aggressive breeds’ without using dog bite data: Using owner reports to establish the most aggressive dog breeds

In 2008, data was published on the ‘most aggressive dogs breeds’, with dachshunds, chihuahuas, and jack russells, coming out on top. Recently, various media reports having been reappearing on my newsfeed on this study, with titles like “The 3 Most Aggressive Breeds Revealed“.

Before we begin, please do acknowledge that I adamantly against BSL. I am heavily influenced by research and evidence and, currently, all the evidence points to breed specific legislation never being effective in reducing the incidence of dog bites, in any place globally.

That being said, because I am interested in science, I am interested in studies like this.

So what can this study teach us about aggression in particular dog breeds?

Cindy the Jack Russell Terrier: In the top three aggressive breeds according to this study.

A Jack Russell Terrier: in the top three aggressive breeds according to this study.

The Flaws in Breed Aggression Research

Aggression is a difficult characteristic to assess in dogs. There are a variety of methods that researchers have used, and all have their ‘downsides’.

Using dog bite statistics is not the best course, as most dog bites go unreported, the dog breeds involved cannot be verified and, even if they are verified, it is impossible to understand how many dogs of that paricular breed exist in the community.

If you’re only looking at caseloads from behavioural clinics, then this data is likely to be biased. Generally, people with larger and more dangerous (because of their size) dogs are more likely to seek help, as are people who have dogs aggressive to members of their family. (This article doesn’t mention it, but finances also play a role here – only those owners with the finances to attend behavioural clinics would be represented in such a study.)

There has been some popularity in behavioural tests (cough – D&CMB proposal – cough) where they do threatening or scary things to a dog and score their responses. The problem with this is how this actually relates to the ‘real world’ and the aggression the dog displays in everyday life.

When you ask owners about their dog’s behaviour, their experiences and responses are subjective. And ‘experts’ aren’t much better, with many of them representing ‘shared stereotypes’ whether conclusions from their own experiences.

Study Design

In this particular study, C-BARQ was used. C-BARQ has a good record as being pretty reliable when it comes to asking owners what their dogs are like, temperamentally.

Members of 11 AKC club (‘club sample’) and vet clinic clients (‘online sample’) were invited to partake.

1,553 C-BARQs were completed by the club sample, with 29 excluded as they did not meet criteria.

8,260 C-BARQs were completed by the online sample, with 1,257 excluded for being mixed breeds or with no breed indicated, and 2,051 excluded as there was less than 45 of that breed represented – so in the end the sample was 4,952 responses for 33 different breeds.

They were rated on aggression towards strangers, owners, and other dogs.

Summarised Findings

The online sample and breed club sample differed in some ways. Breed clubs submitted more intact dogs, more female dogs, and older dogs than those in the online sample. Despite this, the results were quite consistent across the two samples.

Dog aggression was the most common and most severe type of aggression in the study, but dog aggression was not correlated with aggression to people. This supports the widely held view that ‘dog aggression’ does not indicate a risk to people. Similarly, aggression towards household-dogs was not associated with aggression towards other dogs or people. From the data in this study, more than 20% of Akitas, Jack Russell Terriers, and Pit Bulls had serious aggression towards unfamiliar dogs.

When it came to aggression towards people, the highest rates were found in smaller breeds, ‘presumably’ because aggression from smaller (and so more manageable and less dangerous) dogs is more tolerable.

When it came to aggression towards owners, more than half of the aggressive displays towards owners were associated with the owner taking food or something else away from the dog.

While fear in animals is associated with aggression, fear was not strongly correlated with aggression in this study. Some dogs were aggressive but not fearful, some were fearful but not aggressive, and some were fearful and aggressive.

A quote from the study on their findings,

“Although some breeds appeared to be aggressive in most contexts (e.g., Dachshunds, Chihuahuas and Jack Russell Terriers), others were more specific. Aggression in Akitas, Siberian Huskies, and Pit Bull Terriers, for instance, were primarily directed toward unfamiliar dogs. These findings suggest that aggression in dogs may be relatively target specific, and that independent mechanisms may mediate the expression of different forms of aggression.”

Screen shot 2014-02-02 at 5.01.31 PM

Further results on a more breed-by-breed basis (breeds listed alphabetically):

Akitas rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
American Cocker Spaniels rated higher for aggression towards their owners than other breeds.
Australian Cattle Dogs rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds, and also rater higher for aggression towards strangers.
Basset Hounds rated higher for aggression towards their owners than other breeds, but were below average when it came to stranger directed aggression.
Beagles rated higher for aggression towards their owners than other breeds.
Bernese Mountain Dogs were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.
Boxers rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Brittanys were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.
Chihuahuas rated higher for aggression towards people (both owners and strangers) and higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Dachshunds rated higher for aggression towards people (both owners and strangers) and higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
English Springer Spaniels rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds, and also rated higher for aggression towards owners. Showed bred English Springer Spaniels were more aggressive than field bred lines.
German Shepherd Dogs rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Golden Retrievers were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.
Greyhounds were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.
Jack Russell Terriers rated higher for aggression towards people (both owners and strangers) than other breeds and higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Labrador Retrievers were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression. Field bred labradors were more aggressive than show bred labradors.
Pit Bulls rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Siberian Huskies ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.
West Highland White Terriers rated higher for aggression towards other dogs than other breeds.
Whippets were among the breeds least aggressive towards people and dogs, and ranked below average on stranger directed aggression.

Warning against reaching conclusions on the genetic basis of aggression…

The authors caution, “Demographic and environmental risk factors for the development of canine aggression need to be investigated across a variety of breeds so that both generalized and breed-specific influences can be identified.”

So what do you think? Are these studies results consistent with your experiences?

Reference:

Deborah L. Duffy, Yuying Hsu, & James A. Serpell (2008). Breed differences in canine aggression Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 114 (3), 441-460 DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.04.006

View PDF.

Further Reading

More on C-BARQ: Can breeders breed better?

01/17/14

Pets as Gifts – Evidence not Anecdotes

Pets aren’t gifts. We all know that.

If a pet is given as a gift, the recipient might not be prepared for the financial commitment. The pet might be unsuitable to their lifestyle, or the recipieint may be uncommitted. And this means the pet is more likely to be relinquished.

But are you willing to be wrong about that?

This pretty shar pei has found her home through Adelaide All Breed Dog Rescue Inc.

“Studies of dog and cat relinquishment to shelters, however, show that the relinquishment of dogs and cats received as gifts is lower than from other sources,” says Weiss et al. in their 2013 paper. While this blog post will concentrate on this article, it’s important to note that this study builds on the research of others. For example (as summarised by Weiss et al.),

This article looked at 2600 dogs and 2300 cats, and found “Relinquished dogs infrequently came from pet shops, as gifts and from veterinarians. The study found the odds of dog relinquishment were higher when acquiring an animal from a shelter, friend, as a stray, and from a pet shop compared to receiving an animal as a gift”. Cats had similar trends.
This article “identified 71 reasons for pet relinquishment” and unwanted gift made up only 0.3% of dog surrenders and 0.4% of cat surrenders.
And this one found that being received as a gift was a protective factor, with dogs and cats received as gifts being “at [a] significantly decreased risk of being relinquished”.

Simply, there is no evidence that pets being given as gifts leads to relinquishment. It is an unfounded myth.

This study even says, “the myth that dogs and cats should not be given as gifts still persists“.

How was this study conducted?

A large telephone survey of 1006 adults was conducted, with 222 people saying they received a dog or cat as a pet in the last 10 years.

If an individual identified them self as a pet-gift-receipient, they were asked further questions. Were they involved in selecting the pet? How attached are they to their pet? Do they still own the pet?

And what did they find?

Some of the gifted-pets were rehomed – 21 out of the 215 pets. That is, 9.7%.

It didn’t seem to matter if the gift was a surprise or not – it wasn’t associated with people rehoming their pet, or being more or less attached to it.

“These results suggest that there is no increased risk of relinquishment for dogs and cats received as a gift.”

On a side note, this study is different, because it looked at owner retention, instead of shelter relinquishment data. This means that the statistic of 9.7% rehomed is probably higher than shelter surrender intake (as many pets would be rehomed privately instead of through shelter facilities).

How does this relate to shelters?

Weiss et al. express their concern about shelters who prohibit adoptions when they know that the animal is going to be given as a gift. Weiss et al. says, not allowing pets to go as gifts may “impede the overarching goal of increasing adoptions of pets from our nations’ shelter system”.

Significantly, they say (emphasis my own):

“These findings may help animal welfare organisations open options for those interested in obtaining dogs and cats for their family and friends. It is important to note that animals obtained from a shelter are more at risk than those obtained as gifts. Allowing adoptions of dogs and cats to those obtaining the pet as a gift may decrease the risk of return or relinquishment for that dog or cat. Furthermore, it would allow for more animals from shelters to find homes.”

The next thing

Briefly, the article suggests that the next area for study is research and planning, and how that relates to pet retention. Current evidence suggests that ‘spur of the moment’ type acquisitions made with little or no research or planning are not associated with higher rates of relinquishment.

So have you ever received a pet as a gift? And did you keep that pet for its life?

Reference:

Weiss, E, Dolan, ED, Garrison, L, Hong, J & Slater, M (2013). Should dogs and cats be given as gifts? Animals, 3 (4) DOI: 10.3390/ani3040995

01/10/14

CECS in Border Terriers

Regulars of this blog will know that I breed border terriers, and I am excited to share with you some new and ground breaking research within the breed.

In December, the Journal of Small Animal Practice published an article on canine epileptoid cramping syndrome (or CECS) in border terriers. This is exciting because it is the first academic article to consider this condition in border terriers, and it therefore documents and legitimises the condition.

This is Chip (Au & NZ Ch Dalshoj Chippendale ME TD). He does not have CECS but he is a border terrier.

Research Design

A small study of 29 border terriers.
There were 33 respondents in all, but 4 dogs were excluded for not meeting the criteria.
Recruitment took place through veterinarians, using dogs that had diagnosed and treated for CECS.
In 14 of the cases, owners were questioned about their dog’s episodes. In 15 cases, videographic evidence was used.
In order to be included in the study, dogs had to:
- Have a one year history of episodes (i.e. abnormal involuntary hyperkinetic movement)
- These episodes did not include epilepsy-like symptoms (like loss of bladder or bowel control, hyper salivation, or loss of consciousness)
- Have other medical conditions ruled out (if possible)

What happens before a CECS episode?

18 out of the 29 owners felt they could predict the onset of an episode.
11 out of the 29 dogs became ‘quieter’ before an episode.
6 out of the 29 dogs sought comfort in their owners before an episode.
4 out of the 29 dogs would vomit bile or eat grass before an episode.
While most episodes were unpredictable, some owners felt that excitement, waking from sleep, and stress were all triggers.

So what does a CECS episode look like?

Generally, an episode lasts from 2-30 minutes.
All owners felt their dog was uncomfortable during the episode.
Most dogs had difficulty walking (27 of the 29 participants).
Most of the time all four limbs are affected (25 of the 29 participants).
Most dogs had at least some time that they were unable to stand (22 of the 29 participants).
Most had a mild tremor (21 of the 29 participants).
Most had the head or neck affected (21 of 29 participants).
Most had dystonia (muscle tremors) (22 of the 29 participants).
Many had the back and abdomon affected (16 of the 29 participants).
Some licked the air (14 of 29 participants).
Some excessively stretched (14 of 29 participants).
Some had all four limbs go rigid (14 of 29 pariticpants).
Some had the tail affected (11 of 29 participants).
Some dogs got a rumbly tummy (11 of the 29 participants).

What happens after an episode?

Most owners (18 of the 29) described their dogs as acting similar after an episode as before.
11 of 29 respondents were quieter after an episode.
4 of the 29 participants sought human company after an episode.
2 of the 29 participants were hungry after an episode.

What helps reduce symptoms?

Most owners found the condition could be managed by diet. 19 of the respodents changed their dog’s diet as a result of their condition, and over 50% thought that this helped.
Drugs did not help the condition (including phenobarbital, potassium bromide, and buscopan).
Once an episode had started, none of the owners in this study thought they could change the course of the episode.

What is CECS correlated with?

In short: Not much!
Dogs appeared normal despite: blood tests, magnetic resonance imaging, cerbospinal fluid collection and analysis, and neurological examinations.
“No significant underlying metabolic, cardiovascular, respiratory, orthopaedic or other neurological conditions were identified in any respondent.”
15 of the 29 borders also had skin disease.
There is “an apparent association” between CECS and digestive or food intolerance issues.
CECS is not epilepsy. Dogs who have CECS differs from epilepsy as affected dogs remain conscious during an episode, have longer episodes, and do not respond to medication.

Implications for Breeders

Most dogs had their first episode before 3 years. This may mean that only breeding borders 3 years and older, who are asymptomatic, is a way forward. (But some dogs started cramping at 0.2 years, and some at 7 years, so there’s no guarantees.)
10 of the 29 owners (34%) felt that CECS had a negative impact on the dog’s quality of life. While this is a significant number, it is reassuring to think that most owners (66%) therefore did not think that CECS negatively impacted on their dogs life. This is not a way to justify breeding CECS affected dogs, but it is reassuring to know that the condition does not seem to be incredibly debilitating in many situations.
Skin disease is correlated with CECS. Any dogs affected by skin disease should not be considered for a breeding program.
For those trying to determine the inheritance of CECS, it is important to note that CECS is not epilepsy. A condition that can be controlled by medication is almost certainly not CECS, and it would be hazardous to lump the two conditions together.

Congratulations and thank-you to those border terrier people who have been campaigning and working behind the scenes for research like this for many years.

I hope this is the first of much research to come.

This is Clover (Ch Burrowa Blue Flame ME TD DWDF.S) and Chip (Au & NZ Ch Dalshoj Chippendale ME TD). Neither of them are CECS affected, but they’re pretty cute.

Reference:

Black V, Garosi L, Lowrie M, Harvey RJ, & Gale J (2013). Phenotypic characterisation of canine epileptoid cramping syndrome in the Border terrier. The Journal of small animal practice PMID: 24372194

06/23/13

Predicting Adults from Puppies – in 15 Minutes!

A typical vet consult is just 15 minutes. Is this long enough for a vet to diagnose future behavioural problems in puppies? Vaccination consults seem to be an ideal time for vets to assess puppies and make recommendations for the future, but is it really enough time for a vet to reach adequate conclusions? Pageat set out to find out.

Listen to audio:

Or read on…

Rottweiler puppy on vet table having a check up.

256 puppies were observed during a vaccination appointment at the vet. The puppy was first allowed to ‘free range’ around the room, and then the puppy was examined. The behaviour of puppies during this consult was noted. The owner was also asked to answer 8 questions (on fear, sleep, and self control).

Pageat wondered if the behaviours shown by the puppies and the answers given by their owner might have a correlation between the behaviour (including problem behaviour) the puppy may have as an adult.

Telephone consults occurred 1 month after the vaccination consult, then 6 months after, and then another evaluation was done when the dog came in for its vaccination 1 year afterwards.

Pageat found that there was a correlation, and referred to 6 classifications for adult dogs: ‘normal’, deprivation syndrome, hypersensitivity-hyperactivity, disorder of sensory homeostasis, phobia, and separation anxiety.

This preliminary study showed that there was some merit to Pageat’s ideas. Below are the behaviour classifications that Pageat created and how they correlate to the behaviours and questionnaire responses seen in puppyhood.

Normal Dogs

Pups that were likely to have a ‘normal development’, unsurprisingly, displayed normal behaviours in the vet clinic, like:

sought comfort from their owner,
checked out the room while ocassionally checking in with the owner or vet,
sought vet’s contact,
had submissive posture when vet reached over the puppy, and
sometimes cried when restrained, but soon settled.
On the questionnaire, owners said there were no fears, no sleep problems, and no excessive biting.

So: Puppies that act normally in the vet seem to act normally as adults.

Deprivation Syndrome

‘Deprivation syndrome’ is the term that Pageat used, which means dogs that are under socialised and so fearful of most things, which in turn leads to fear aggression. (source)

In the vet consult, pups were more likely to grow up with deprivation syndrome if they:

were stationary (didn’t move around the exam room),
reacted fearfully when touched by the vet,
remained fearful even when the owner interacted with them,
persistantly tried to escape and bite from restraint, and.
if they appeared to calm when restrained, they started fighting again when the restraint was lessened.
The owner’s responses to the questionnaire described the puppy as ‘fearful’ towards loud noises, moving objects, and people.

That is: puppies that acted fearful during the 15 minute vet consult will probably stay fearful. They should immediately start an intensive socialisation program to try to reduce their fearful reactions.

Hypersensitivity-Hyperactivity Syndrome

‘Hypersensitivity-hyperactivity syndrome’ is basically a dog with lack of control, especially bite inhibition. They are often not-aggressive but nonetheless hurt their owners and others because of their lack of bite inhibition in ‘over the top’ play.

In the vet consult, pups were more likely to grow up with this syndrome if they:

were active, ran everywhere,
repeatedly interacted with ‘every thing’ they could in the exam room,
if this interaction included chewing and often destroying items,
immediately started to play during the physical exam,
growled and bit,
tried to escape restraint by biting, urinating, or defecating, and if this fighting may continue for 30 seconds or more,
had an owner who’s presence didn’t influence the puppy’s behaviour, and
had an owner who was covered in bites themselves.
Owners on the questionnaire indicated the puppy didn’t sleep solidly (i.e. made noise at night) and described the puppy as rough or bitey when playing.

That is: Puppies who seemed hyperactive and orally fixated would stay that way into adulthood. Puppies in this category should be put in puppy playgroups and otherwise taught to inhibit their bite.

Disorder of Sensory Homeostasis

This was the most confusing classification that Pageat used. Here are a couple of definitions I was able to come up with in regard to ‘sensory homeostasis’:

“the ability to react in a suitable manner to sensory stimulations coming from the external environment” (source)
“The normal state can be regarded as the normosensoperceptive [normal sensory perceptive] condition to be maintained in the physiological range by means of various cooperative and coordinated mechanisms” (source)

That is, ‘dealing with’ (behaviourally, psychologically, and physically) the environment in a normal way. So, a dog who has ‘sensory homeostasis’ could be described as ‘a dog that reacts suitably to sensory input from its environment’.

The behaviours of puppies in this group were diverse:

Puppies were active, running everywhere and chewing everything – or they did the opposite, staying in one place resting and not moving much.
Puppies either began to play when you interacted with them, or just stayed still.
These puppies bit when they were restrained – sometimes with urinating and defecating as well, but always did not submit.
The owners reported these puppies were fearful, that they didn’t sleep well or were active, and they were rough biting and playful.

As you can see, there is a lot of variety in this category, and I’m not sure what conclusions can actually be reached. This is especially true when you compare with the rather logical and conclusive results made under different headings.

Phobic Adult Dogs

Dogs were more likely to be fearful adults if they were puppies that:

sought comfort from owners in new environments,
if the explored, they checked in with the owner or vet as exploring,
adopted a submissive posture during handling,
cried softly during restraint, or
moved legs when restrained, but soon calms down and is submissive.

That is, the pups that overall seemed quite soft and ‘submissive’ and sought reassurance from people were likely to be fearful dogs in adulthood. These puppies could also have their behaviour remedied by socialisation where they could learn to be more outgoing (as they realise the world is a not-so-scary place).

Separation Anxiety

Separation anxiety is basically a fear of being alone. Pups that exhibited the following behaviours were more likely to have separation anxiety as an adult:

rests as close as possible to the place it was left,
vet has to initate contact, and
pup exhibits fearful behaviours like escaping, biting, urinating, defecating or anal sac excretion, but when the owner approaches, these behaviours stops.
The owner answered ‘yes’ to fearful behaivours on the questionnaire.

A vet could recommend that puppies displaying these behaviours begin to engage in a separation anxiety program before issues become apparent. Undertaking anti-separation anxiety procedures are good practice, anyway, but could be applied with more emphasis in puppies like this.

Implications

Unfortunately, this research is almost 10 years old and hasn’t been as revolutionary as first hoped. However, it shows there is still promise in the original suggestion: Vets could have a role in preventing problem behaviours from developing or becoming more pronounced by making recommendations based on behaviours seen in a 15 minute consult. Vets are a major source of information for dog owners, including new puppy owners, and almost all puppies will visit a vet for at least their first vaccination. Because of this, it’s vital that we make the most of these consults and direct puppy buyers to appropriate resources.

Links of Interest

Resources for New Puppy Owners

How to Stop Puppy Biting

Reference

Pageat, P 2004, ‘Evaluating the quality of behavor development in puppies: preliminary results of a new scale’, Proceedings of the 10th European Congress on Companion Animal Behavioural Medicine.

06/7/13

The Range of Imitation in Dogs

This is a brief review of the extensive work by German researcher Friederike Range, looking at imitation or modelling behaviour in dogs. Previously, I posted anecdotal evidence on modelling in dogs (which many people shared their experiences on). This post is more sciencey!

Border terrier and young woman running in large paddock with bushes behind them.

Dogs can imitate the behaviour of both dogs and people. Imitation success depends on a range of factors, including:

The task at hand, including its complexity, has a role in imitation.
If a human is modelling the behaviour, if they are talking, this can either help or hinder the dog’s modelling, depending on the task. Eye contact can also help (or hinder) a dog in a task. It can help, as it may illustrate to the dogs bits that it should pay particular attention to. However, it make hinder as it may distract the dog from the task at hand.
Training plays a role. Dogs that are ‘better trained’ are better at making deduction on behaviour from witnessing a model.
The dog’s individual personality.

Interestingly, dogs don’t ‘blindly model’ behaviour of other dogs. They will try to be more efficient, they will learn from the other model’s mistakes, and make adjustments based on particular circumstances. For example, if a dog witnesses the model dog carrying a ball and pushing a lever with its foot, the dog will imitate by pushing the lever with its mouth. The dog seems to realise the model dog used its foot because its mouth was occupied. However, if the model dog pushed the lever with its foot without anything in his mouth, the dog will imitate the foot-push. (Almost, the dog imitates superstitious behaviours.)

Fascinatingly, several dogs have been trained to imitate behaviour. A dog called Joy was trained with the cue ‘Do it!’. The experimenter would do one of eight behaviours, say ‘do it’, and Joy would then do the behaviour just demonstrated. After several weeks, they then asked Joy to ‘do’ a behaviour that the experimenter had never demonstrated behaviour. Joy did it. Joy understood the concept of ‘do what I do’. You can see more videos of dogs ‘doing it’.

The conclusions are: Yes, of course dogs model the behaviour of people and dogs. Indeed, they can be trained to do so. There is still a lot of research going on about all the facets of imitation, and it’s all truly fascinating. Definitely a space to watch.

Links of Interest

Do dogs imitate? by Patricia McConnell.

Dogs show human-like learning ability.

If you’re aggressive, your dog probably will be to.

Dogs automatically imitate people.

References

Huber, L, Range, F, Viranyi, Z & Voelkl, B 2008, ‘The evolution of imitation: Old wine in new bottles?’ (PDF).

Range, F., Heucke, S., Gruber, C., Konz, A., Huber, L., & Virányi, Z. (2009). The effect of ostensive cues on dogs’ performance in a manipulative social learning task Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 120 (3-4), 170-178 DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2009.05.012

Range, F., & Viranyi, Z. (2009). Different aspects of social learning in dogs Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 4 (6) DOI: 10.1016/j.jveb.2009.05.007

Range, F., Viranyi, Z., & Huber, L. (2007). Selective Imitation in Domestic Dogs Current Biology, 17 (10), 868-872 DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.04.026

Szucsich, A, Range, F, Miklosi, A, Huber, L 2008, ‘Imitative ability of dogs‘.

Tiefenthaler, M, Range, F, & Huber, L 2008, ‘Personality in dogs and its influence on social learning behaviour‘.

Virányi, Z., & Range, F. (2009). How does ostensive communication influence social learning in dogs? Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 4 (2) DOI: 10.1016/j.jveb.2008.10.023

Viranyi, Z, Range, F, & Huber L 2008, ‘The influence of ostensive demonstration on selective imitation in dogs‘.

Blogging on all things dogs, particularly dog science and dog politics.

Tag Archives: research

Aggressive Breeds via Owner Accounts

Pets as Gifts – Evidence not Anecdotes

CECS in Border Terriers

Predicting Adults from Puppies – in 15 Minutes!

The Range of Imitation in Dogs